The civility initiative, part 7: today's "Civility Ball"

     You’ll recall that, a month or two ago, we alerted the campus community (see) to a curious report on the products of the December meeting of the “Civility and Mutual Respect” Working Group. The report included a “draft” of a “civility statement.” The draft was crafted by John Spevak—a hired gun from a Sacramento firm that absurdly calls itself the College Brain Trust—on behalf of the Working Group. 
     The “civility statement"  suggested, among other things, that supervisors’ employee evaluations should include mention of employees’ civility—or lack thereof.

     So we turned on the alarm bells.

     Well, pretty soon, there was quite a ruckus, which culminated in an interesting Academic Senate meeting in which faculty were assured that the Civility Enforcement Express had been shut down. Worry not!

     Then, not long after, came a tone-deaf email from President Roquemore that declared that

     On Friday, March 23, 2012, from 12:30 to 5 p.m. …, the second meeting of the IVC Working Group on Civility and Mutual Respect will be held. This meeting is an open forum…. 

. . .
     The facilitators will review the prioritized comments and suggestions made on December 16 … and use them as a starting point for crafting recommendations to the District's Board Policy and Administrative Regulations Committee. We will also create an action plan with specific steps to develop a culture of mutual respect and civility within the IVC community….

     Nothing in the email hinted at the absurd and regrettable excesses of the aforementioned Spevak report or the senate meeting in which administrators did some serious backpedaling.

     Pretty freakin’ clueless, if you ask me.

* * *

At the civility ball

     So, last night, someone twisted my arm plenty hard to get me to show up to what Rebel Girl has dubbed the “Civility Ball”—i.e., today’s much ballyhooed “second meeting” of the Civility work group. So, after class this morning, I got some work done in my office and then, just before 1:00, sashayed over to BSTIC for this shindig.

     Here’s my report. I’ll try to be civil:

     About 25 people showed up, including some managers and administrators, some faculty, two (very nice) students, and some classified. Spevak was there, coming across like a cross between Werner Erhard and, um, a harried Kindergarten teacher. (Spevak: “Roy, what R-word have you chosen for yourself?" A: “redneck.”)

     Things settled into a fun and informal (if a bit touchy-feely) atmosphere pretty quickly. Spevak asked if, before we proceeded, anyone had any concerns or questions, and I said something like: we have various values, and values can come into conflict. Civility is one value, but so is being allowed to express one’s opinions, etc., without fear of retaliation. I worry (I said) about pursuing a “civility” policy without at the same time doing something to ensure that other values are not undermined. (In the course of our conversation, Spevak expressed regret about the unfortunate "evaluation" element in his draft.)

     There was considerable discussion after that. Some suggested that we should be pursuing a policy that ensures that everyone can speak their mind without fear of retribution. Some noted that, given the fear of retaliation (that some report), pursuing this kind of policy won't help. Some (including me) worried that we cannot control what is done with our recommendations once they are sent forward.

     I reminded John Spevak where he was: a college in which, in the past, faculty had their tenure threatened owing to who they associated with; or were disciplined on the basis of trumped up charges of “discrimination” or “workplace violence.” I mentioned that, 9 years ago, our VPI issued a directive according to which faculty were forbidden to discuss the Iraq War in the classroom. After the matter had settled down a bit, at a senate meeting, faculty asked the VPI, Dennis White, where the matter stood (with respect to the directive). His answer: don’t ask for clarification; you might not like what you get.

     That directive, I said, has never been rescinded.

     Glenn responded by suggesting that VPI White was “fired” because of that action, among others. (White issued his directive in April of 2003; he was fired in September of 2006.) He also suggested that, with our current Chancellor and board, we have a window of opportunity to deal with relatively reasonable people. (That's true, I think.)
     But others noted that, though at present we have a decent Chancellor and board, that might not remain true. We need to worry about what will be done with these policies when less trustworthy people assume these roles.

     The discussion was quite good, something Spevak kept insisting on even as he moved us right along to the next step in producing recommendations toward creating a district policy on civility. Off we went.

     Everyone was tasked with writing five suggestions for five “civility” issues (on 3x5 cards). Then five groups were formed, each with a group leader. Each group got one of the issues and then synthesized the card suggestions. This business went on for a while. There were two rounds of it, yielding lists written on large sheets of paper, speckled with red, green, and yellow "dots," indicating participants' favorite points.

     The upshot: everyone seemed to work well and happily on these tasks. Many points were made, including the need to reject any approach to civility that enforced alleged “civil” behavior with sanctions; the importance of creating more community and providing forums for discussion of “difficult” issues; vigilant protection of free speech; an increase in administrative “transparency” and regular, honest communication with the campus community; the institution of an “ombudsman” to deal with civility issues as they arise; clear recognition that enforcement of civility rules would be a form of incivility; and so on.

     All of this took place from 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

     I think it went as well as could be hoped for. Be looking for emails that include drafts of 5 paragraphs that attempt to communicate the above suggestions.
     So far, so good, but remember: eternal vigilance!

Shooting Star, part 10: the "grand scheme of patronage"

The entire “Fuentes/Shooting Star” saga can be found here.

El Toro Road, 1970

Ronald Caspers

            This series of posts has focused on the 1974 disappearance of the Shooting Star and the political corruption and misdeeds that served as that tragedy's backdrop. Recently, I acquired a copy of Agents’ Orange, a history of recent Orange County politics by former OC GOP chair Tom Rogers, who, starting in the 80s, emerged as a leader in the fight against developers and the Supervisors they “owned.”

            Here’s Rogers' discussion of Ronald Caspers, who perished in the 1974 disaster and who, it seems, was a pretty nasty piece of work:

            [TAKING OUT ALTON ALLEN.] The incumbent in the 5^th district was [Republican] Alton Allen [born: 1897], a retired banker, who lived in the charming village of Laguna Beach….

            Allen was widely respected for his representation of the 5^th District, which included the beach communities of Newport, Balboa, Laguna, and San Clemente, plus the vast inland areas held by the Irvine Ranch and the Rancho Mission Viejo, with thousands of acres devoted to agricultural production.

Alton Allen

            It came as a rude shock when, in 1969, a tabloid-type mailer was received by residents of the 5th District alleging wrongdoing on the part of Allen and his staff. Allen’s reputation for honesty and integrity had been undoubted, never a whisper against his character had ever been heard. Campaign finance reporting requirements were almost nonexistent in those days, so it was impossible to determine who was behind this puzzling attack, which was to develop into a recall movement. Anthony Tarantino, one of the nominal sponsors of the mailer, … was a man of modest means and it was obvious that there was someone else, unidentified, who was engaged in the expensive campaign to destroy Alton Allen’s character.

            Allen contacted Republican leadership for help against this scurrilous attack. At a meeting at the Balboa Bay Club, GOP leaders met with Allen and those in attendance were at a loss for any explanation of the anti-Allen campaign. The retired banker was obviously distraught at having unfounded insinuations directed at himself and his staff. There was some speculation tentatively expressed. Organized crime? Democrats taking over a neglected facet of Orange County politics? ….

            [NEXT: RECALL.] The mysterious anti-Allen forces opened a headquarters in Laguna Hills from which to launch a formal recall campaign. The mailers kept arriving with insinuations of Allen’s “wrongdoing.” Staff at the recall headquarters refused any information to the press that had become interested in the plot. The Alton Allen recall petition failed to obtain sufficient signatures and it is doubtful that the exercise was anything other than to prepare the way for the upcoming supervisorial election in the 5th District. Alton Allen’s campaign for reelection was close at hand.

Paul Carpenter

            [CELLA AND HARBER.] It would be revealed later that Tarantino had ties to [corruption kingpin] Lou Cella, [Shooting Star owner] Fred Harber, and others identified by [corrupt Supervisor] Robert Battin as “the Coalition.” Battin, in an attempt to depict his own conviction as discriminatory, revealed the existence of the group, which also included [OC land baron] R.J. O’Neill.

            Tarantino’s connection was that as a cabinet-maker he had worked for Cella and become friends with both him and Fred Harber. It was at their request that he agreed to lend his name to the Allen recall. Tarantino was also on the payroll of the Mission Viejo Hospital at $800 per month, until the law caught up with Cella.

            The original plan to recall Allen was scrubbed when it was decided that if Allen were recalled, Governor Reagan would probably appoint his assistant John Killifer, who was in no way connected to the scheme….

            [THE "SHADOW GOVERNMENT"* VS. ALLEN.] Robert Battin was to use his position on the Board of Supervisors to make Allen look inept in dealing with certain issues. [Local politician and (ultimately) convicted felon] Paul Carpenter also admitted to being part of the recall effort much later, but denied knowledge of the other Coalition members being involved. Carpenter claimed that the clandestine effort was confined to himself and a Republican who aspired to be a supervisor.

            [RON CASPERS EMERGES.] Emerging out of the shadows was Ron Caspers, a Republican who was the owner of Keystone Savings and Loan in Westminster. In the beginning there were suspicions expressed that he was the moving force behind Allen’s recall, a charge he denied but which was later confirmed in the course of several unrelated criminal prosecutions.

Robert Battin

            [AN EARLIER BOATING DISASTER.] Caspers had made headlines prior to the Allen affair. He and his wife Beatrice had been cruising in coastal waters south of Port Hueneme in the ketch Aloha on the night of October 1, 1954. With Caspers at the helm, the Aloha veered in front of an oncoming Coast Guard cutter. The Aloha sank and the remains of Beatrice Caspers were never found, despite an intensive search by Coast Guard vessels and aircraft. An investigation by the U.S. Coast Guard of this tragedy at sea never resulted in any criminal proceedings.

            Allen’s reelection campaign received no help from the GOP, and his campaign staff were amateurs, at best. Alton never recovered from the personal attacks and he went down to defeat.

            Casper had made his conservative Republican credentials a key part of the contest, although investigation turned up the fact that he had been a sponsor of and signatory to a “Republican for Alan Cranston” newspaper political advertisement. [Cranston’s political career was later destroyed by his involvement in the Keating Five scandal.]

. . .

            [CASPERS, THE COALITION, AND “SHAKEDOWN” RUMORS.] With Caspers’ election, Orange County politics were turned upside down. It was the dawning of a new era, and whether Caspers was a Republican or a Democrat, the special interests flocked to his office confident that they had a supervisor with whom they could do “business.”

            The fact he claimed to be a Republican had little to do with the support he received from the Coalition. That group supported other Republicans including Larry Schmit for supervisor.

            Caspers is rumored to have indicated that important county appointments, such as the Planning Commission, would cost an applicant $15,000.

            [ENTER YOUNG TOM FUENTES.] Caspers hired a young graduate of Chapman College who had helped in his campaign to serve on this staff. As Casper’s assistant, Tom Fuentes [born: 1949] (who would become prominent in Republican circles later on) worked diligently to convince Republicans that Caspers was not what many party regulars feared, an unscrupulous opportunist who had no permanent loyalty to any political party. Fuentes was aided in his duties by the ubiquitous Frank Michelena. Michelena, a lobbyist with a checkered career, was notorious in the field of political influence. [“Checkered” is an understatement.]

            If there were ever any doubts regarding Casper’s ties to the Democratic Party, they were soon dispelled. It was discovered later that Caspers had a business arrangement with [Democrat] Ken Cory through a company called Anaheim Insurance Agency. It was out of the office of this company that Democrats operated their registration efforts in Orange County. Assemblyman Cory was to be the subject of a criminal investigation concerning the no bid purchase of insurance by the City of Carson in Los Angles County. Although several Carson City Councilmen were involved, Cory was never indicted.

Ken Cory

            In this election, it appears that the candidate preceded the special interests, and it was after his election that Caspers made the contacts and set the ground rules for developer participation in the grand scheme of patronage carried to an exponential degree.

            [ORGANIZED CRIME?] In a later criminal case, a paid informant with reputed ties to organized crime would allege that Caspers had received a $600,000 loan from two banks, Coast and U.S. National. The informant, Gene Conrad, had been working with the district attorney’s office in an attempt to connect the Board of Supervisors to the syndicate. Conrad’s testimony did not bear out the suspicion of the D.A. that supervisors had been provided with interest-free loans from gambling interests. Conrad stated that his research had determined that the loan in question did carry interest. Whether it was ever paid back remains a mystery.

. . .

Leisure World, 1974

            Casper’s career was cut short on June 14, 1974, when he disappeared at sea aboard the Shooting Star owned by Fred Harber. Caspers and his two sons were returning from a trip to Cabo San Lucas in Baja California when Harber’s converted … rescue craft was overtaken by a violent storm. After sending out a mayday signal on January 13, the vessel was never heard from again, and all of the occupants were presumed dead, lost at sea.            

            [FUENTES AND OVERBY DODGE A BULLET.] Tom Fuentes, who was scheduled to go on the trip, backed out at the last minute, and was saved from a similar fate. Another county luminary who backed out of the ill-fated trip at the last minute was Lyle Overby.

            Despite a full-scale search operation directed by Fuentes that included the use of commercial swordfishing “spotter planes,” no trace of the craft of its passengers was ever found.

SEE Part 11

*OC DA Cecil Hicks' phrase (referring to Louis Cella, et al.)

Shooting Star, part 9: straight-shooting conservative Tom Rogers on Caspers, Harber, and what they portended

The entire “Fuentes/Shooting Star” saga can be found here.

Tom Rogers (1924-2006), OC GOP chair, 1969-1972

             (For parts 1-8, go here.)
             TALK TO TOM ROGERS. The other night, I spoke with an old acquaintance who’s been active in mostly Democratic politics in Orange County going back at least thirty years. I mentioned to him that I was researching the sinking of the “Shooting Star.” He immediately knew what I was referring to.

            “You need to talk to Tom Rogers,” he said. “He’s the guy who knows.”

            “Yeah? Is he still alive?” I asked.

            “Don’t know.”

            When I got home, I did a little research. Tom Rogers was an interesting guy. He grew up in LA County, served with distinction during WW II, went to college on the GI Bill, got married, and, by the early 60s, owned a ranch in south Orange County.

Tom Riley, developers' friend

            That’s when he got into politics. Rogers was decidedly right-wing—he was an early supporter of the notorious John Schmitz. But he was also the kind of now-rare conservative who was into “conserving” things, especially the rural life of OC that still existed in the 60s and that now exists only in the canyons of the Santa Ana Mountains (where the Reb and I live). 
            He was a leader: he served as the Chair of the local GOP from 1969 to1972 and then served as a state GOP big shot during Reagan’s gubernatorial years (see).

            But things changed. Especially after Ron Caspers was replaced with Reagan appointee Thomas Riley—that fellow was the answer to developers’ dreams—Rogers settled into a slow-growth philosophy that directly opposed the “rapid development” direction of the Board of Supervisors and their Big Money patrons. Hell, in his efforts to oppose the developers and their Supervisors, he even embraced bipartisanship.

            The story is told in a 1996 article by Nathan Callahan: Tobacco Road: Tom Rogers & the Philip Morris Tollway.

            I’ve gotta say: Tom Rogers may have been a conservative Republican, but he was a cool guy. Read the article and see why. It comes as no surprise that the left-wing Callahan declared Rogers to be “my favorite Orange County Republican.”

            According to my friend (who is a close associate of Callahan's), Rogers always thought that the sinking of the Shooting Star was seriously hinky. The whole business soured him on the OC GOP. Or so the friend said.

* * *

Ron Caspers

            CALLING MRS. ROGERS. I looked Rogers up. I managed to find a phone number, called it. His wife, who seems to have a European accent, answered the phone.

            I said: “Hello, is Mr. Tom Rogers there?”

            “My husband died six years ago. In fact the date of his death is a month away: April 16. Why are you calling?”

            “I’m writing an article about the sinking of the Shooting Star in 1974.”

            “Oh, Ron Caspers?”

            She told me that she wasn’t the one to talk to about that, that her husband had written about Caspers and the Shooting Star in his book.

            “Agents’ Orange?” I asked. That was the only book that Rogers seems to have written. It was published in 2000.

            She then recited the whole title: “Agents’ Orange: the unabridged political history of Orange County 1960-2000.”

            “We stopped printing it,” she said. “But we made the book available to local libraries.”

            I told her that I had already located a copy at the Santa Ana Public Library and that I would probably be reading it tomorrow.

            “Sorry to bother you,” I said.

            “It’s no bother. I’m glad that people are still interested in those things.”

            I’m not entirely sure what she meant by “those things,” but I'll take whatever encouragement I can get.

Irvine Heritage Library: "lost"

            LIBRARY SNIPE HUNT. Yesterday, I finished my last class and got back to my office. I Googled “Agents’ Orange.” I found that the book was supposed to be available just down the street, at the Irvine Heritage Park Library. So I zipped over there, found the book’s call numbers, and headed for the stacks.
            Couldn’t find it.

            I asked a librarian for help, and that sent her into a fury of searching and conferring and whatnot. After about twenty minutes, she acknowledged that the book was “lost.” That’s an official category, evidently. 

            While at the Irvine Heritage, I found that the book was supposed to be available also at the San Juan Capistrano Library, and so I headed down the 5. Fifteen minutes later, I entered the smallish building, just behind the Mission, and headed for the reference section. 
            Couldn’t find the book.

San Juan Capistrano Library: "lost"

            Talked to a librarian. She informed me that the book was in the “California Collection,” which, as it happened, was immediately behind me. Aha! She walked over and looked for it. 
            Couldn't find the book. 
            That sent her into search and confer mode, and, at the end of that process she declared that the book was “lost.”

            Gosh, what are the chances?

            I headed home and called the Santa Ana Public Library, which was also supposed to have a copy, but their copy was in the “Local History” room, which is only open from Tuesdays through Thursdays. (It was Monday.) Dang! So I planned to go there the next day.

            Feeling lucky, I did a quick search at Irvine Valley College Library, and, guess what? They supposedly had a copy, too, and it was “available”! Skeptical, I called up the IVC Library and spoke with some guy who went in search of the book. After about fifteen minutes, he declared, “Got it!”

IVC Library: "Got it!"

            TOM ROGERS' EXCELLENT ADVENTURE. So, today, I picked up the book. Just now, I got a chance to give it a quick once over. It appears to be excellent. It is a marvelous book that seems to have been almost entirely ignored for the last dozen years. Near as I could tell, it had never been checked out at any of those libraries.

            I’ll have more soon, but, for now, I'll start off with some quotations that provide a sense of Rogers' theses.
            This is from Rogers’ “Introduction.” According to Rogers’ "unabridged" OC History, starting in the 1970s,

the driving forces behind those who would gain political control of Orange County were motivated by the pursuit of corporate profits, and party affiliation was simply a matter of convenience rather than conviction.
. . .
        The most devastating result of dollar politics was that Republicans and Democrats abandoned their core party principles. The temptation was just too strong to win elections with the unlimited funds available to those who passed the litmus test. The special interests were soon able to control the county and some cities when computer technology replaced motivated volunteers as a decisive force in winning elections.

El Toro Road (in Caspers' district), 1970

             THE "CAVE MEN." Eventually, according to Rogers,

a relatively small group of Republican incumbents began to exert influence at the state level, by pre selecting candidates for State Assembly and Senate. The criteria for their selection process was a willingness … to accept and embrace the incumbents’ view of what constitutes a “proper” conservative. Once they passed this Biblical/Philosophical vetting, those Republicans who made the cut would have the assurance of sizeable donations plus professional management of their campaigns. This all-knowing, all-powerful group became known as “The Cave Men” [elsewhere, Rogers notes that the term is non-pejorative], who by virtue of being incumbents had the capability of extracting money from lobbyists in Sacramento, a literal bonanza for all ambitious politicians…. Whether it was the financial support of the special interests or of the GOP incumbents, the net result was that in many cases individuals were elected to an office for which they were totally unqualified.

Tom and wife at Supervisor Riley's annual BBQ, c. mid-80s

             THE COALITION. In one section of his book, Rogers provides a chronological sketch of the events covered in his book. Things don’t really start popping until 1970:

1970   Mysterious newcomer runs a behind-the-scenes campaign to gain election to the Board of Supervisors. Ron Caspers is elected in the 5th District, changing the direction of politics in Orange County. Ralph Clark is also elected to the board making a third vote for the emerging special interests. This new group of wealthy individuals is called The Coalition, and they begin to exert power in Orange County. [Rogers later states that the “Coalition” comes to an end in 1978 with the indictment of Louis Cella, Richard O'Neill's partner in achieving political influence.]

Dr. Louis Cella

            Despite their brief tenure, Caspers and Co. loom large in Rogers’ remarkable account of OC political corruption: “…[M]any blame [Caspers] for the descent of Orange County into the world of political intrigue, campaign finance abuses, and influence peddling” (p. 154).

            CASPERS AND HARBER: SHAKEDOWN. Elsewhere, Rogers discusses “Shooting Star” owner, Fred Harber (you’ll recall that Harber was among the ten victims of the Shooting Star disaster that also took Caspers' life), who, according to Rogers, engaged in an activity “now called lobbying”:

     Harber had been considered a prime mover in county politics….   Prior to his disappearance, he was alleged to have been involved in a shakedown of a developer in behalf of Supervisor Caspers. The builder Richard V. Jordan, in a sworn statement, declared that Harber had contacted him after his project in Casper’s 5th District had been turned down, and had told him what it would take to solve the problem. “$10,000 and $2,000 per month” Harber is alleged to have demanded form Jordan…. 
     Jordan asserted in his deposition that the meeting with Harber was prior to meeting with Caspers in a rubber raft off Cabo San Lucas. Jordan was represented by attorney R.S. “Sam” Barnes and his client contacted District Attorney [and Cella foe] Cecil Hicks and arranged for a payoff with marked bills. [A sting!] Before the plan was put into motion, Caspers won reelection and, with Harber, boarded the Shooting Star and headed once again for the Cape…. [From there, the ship headed north and disappeared.]   In the end the county paid off $700,000 to Jordan’s company…, as a result of losses caused by the extortion scheme.

            In his 1984 article ("The Sinking of a Political Machine"), journalist Larry Peterson wondered if Harber and Caspers attempted this "shakedown" with others—others who, unlike Jordan, were disposed to respond with violence rather than litigation.
            Rogers’ account of the dirty tricks campaign waged in 1969 against Republican Supervisor Alton Allen is fascinating. As it turns out, Ron Caspers was behind that campaign. Caspers won the Supervisorial seat away from Allen in 1970, with Tom Fuentes’ help.

            One more thing: in his book's first reference to the "Shooting Star" disaster, Rogers writes: "Fred Harber's controversial career was cut short by what appeared to be a maritime accident" (151).
            "Appeared to be"?

—More to come—
SEE Part 10

OC Supervisor Alton Allen, 1969.
Essentially taken out by dirty trickster Ron Caspers.
Tom Fuentes was Caspers' right hand man

Freeze!

from today's Los Angeles Times, the indefatigable Carla Rivera reports the latest:

Cal State plans to freeze enrollment next spring at most campuses

Facing uncertain budget prospects, California State University officials announced plans to freeze enrollment next spring at most campuses and to wait-list all applicants the following fall pending the outcome of a proposed tax initiative on the November ballot.

The university is moving to reduce enrollment to deal with $750 million in funding cuts already made in the 2011-12 fiscal year and position itself for at least an additional $200-million cut next year if the tax proposal fails.

The move is a high-stakes gambit that could deny tens of thousands of students access to the state's largest public university system; it also pressures voters to support the tax increase. That proposal, backed by Gov. Jerry Brown, is intended to avoid so-called trigger cuts that will dramatically affect the state's public colleges and universities.

To read the rest, click here.

*

Scenes from Spring Break

‎"James Dean died 'neath the tree of heaven
Near the old Jack Ranch Cafe
Brother Donald Turnupseed must have
Looked the wrong damn way

Oh, that German Porsche was burning
As the hawks took to the air
Forty miles from Paso Robles, in a land
Called, 'Way out there'..."

Lost Hills:





*

You should hear what they say about you

Who Cheats, and How (Inside Higher Ed)

Eighty-four percent of students at a public research university believe students who cheat should be punished, yet two of every three admit to having cheated themselves. Most of the cheating students admit to involves homework, not tests, and they see academic misconduct applying differently to those two kinds of work….